This contribution argues that there is no "transnational" concept of human dignity or of public policy. These concepts are essentially local and we should not try to harmonize them by drafting common principles or rules. To substantiate this thesis, the inquiry into the harmonizing effect of human dignity and public policy takes place at four different levels. First, two instruments in the field of international contract law (the PECL and the Unidroit Principles) are considered. Second, some case law of the European Court of Justice (notable the Omega case) is looked at. A third level of inquiry concerns a representative case of the Human Rights Committee of the United Nations (the Wackenheim case). The fourth level of analysis is whether a uniform interpretation of human dignity is likely at the national level. In the absence of one uniform concept of human dignity, one should stop claiming that it could form a barrier against the negative effects of globalization.

The fiftieth anniversary of the European Court of Human Rights this year is an occasion for both celebration and apprehension. From a timid beginning the Court has grown into a full-time institution successfully dealing with thousands of cases each year. Its case law is generally perceived to be among the most developed and extensive of all international human rights institutions and most of its judgments are routinely implemented by the state parties to the European Convention on Human Rights (ECHR).
However, for over a decade dark clouds have been gathering over Strasbourg. The number of applications has been rising so sharply  partly due to the accession of a large number of new state parties to the ECHR  that the very work and survival of the Court seems to be at risk. It is precisely because of these high numbers that the Court has started to deal creatively with large-scale violations of human rights by way of so-called pilot judgments. This article will assess this new phenomenon which holds the promise of being the most creative tool the Court has developed in its first fifty years of its existence. First, it will look at what pilot judgments are and in which cases the Court has applied the pilot methodology. Secondly, the main reasons for setting up the pilot judgment procedure will be considered. Finally, this article will analyse the challenges the pilot judgment procedure faces, such as its legal basis and the position of applicants in comparable cases.

Conflicts between individual fundamental rights are both pervasive and problematic in the system of the European Convention on Human Rights. This paper is an attempt to illuminate these two dimensions, as well as a plea for taking conflicts of rights more seriously within the Convention legal order.
The paper uses a comparative law perspective to demonstrate that the Convention system operates with an exceptionally broad category of conflicts between individual fundamental rights. The size and location of this category are attributable, at least in part, to the Convention systems exclusive reliance on a rights-based perspective and the corresponding absence of any division of powers jurisdiction for the European Court of Human Rights. This institutional set-up, unique among (quasi)-constitutional courts, coupled with the absence of a thick understanding of democracy at the European level, pushes the Court towards framing a large proportion of conflicts between individual and collective interests before it as conflicts between individual fundamental rights.
Although current institutional arrangements significantly limit possibilities for the Strasbourg Court to modify its approach, the paper does propose a number of ways in which the ECHR could take conflicts of fundamental rights more seriously. These suggestions focus on situations in which framing a conflict as a clash between individual rights may be suboptimal, suscpicious, or both. The situations identified are those in which (1) individuals are opposed to the rights of majorities, (2) individuals are opposed to the rights of public officials, and (3) cases in which the distribution of, or access to, public resources is a central issue.

An important aspect of the structure of fundamental rights is the bifurcation between the definition of scope and the review of justifi cation. Although this bifurcation is of great importance both to the division of the burden of proof and to the use of such tools as the doctrine of the margin of appreciation, it appears that the European Court of Human Rights does not always take it seriously. The Court often fails to address issues of definition or merges the two elements into a single test. This paper highlights some of the problematic consequences of the Courts current approach; in the end, this approach may hamper the effectiveness of the European Convention on Human Rights and limit the protection offered to individual citizens. A more structured approach toward the scope and definition of Convention rights may help to solve or avoid these problems.

Academic legal scholarship increasingly relies on non-normative perspectives. This raises the question what is actually the core of academic legal scholarship and what methodology legal academics should adopt. In this contribution, it is argued that the focus in the present debate should not be on how other disciplines than the law can help us to make the academic study of law more 'scholarly.' Instead, the question should be how the legal approach itself can better match the expectations one has about a truly scholarly discipline of law. To this end, the purpose of normative legal scholarship is redefined.

This contribution examines the effect of the uniform standards of human rights in international conventions on criminal process in different countries and identifies factors inherent in national systems that influence the scope of international standards and the way in which they are implemented in a national context. Three overreaching issues influence the reception of international fundamental rights and freedoms in criminal process: constitutional arrangements, legal tradition and culture, and practical circumstances. There is no such thing as the uniform implementation of convention standards; even in Europe where the European Convention on Human Rights and Fundamental Freedoms and the case law of the European Court play a significant role, there is still much diversity in the actual implementation of international norms due to the influence of legal traditions which form a counterforce to the weight of convention obligations. An even greater counterforce is at work in practical circumstances that can undermine international norms, most especially global issues of security, crime control and combating terrorism. Although convention norms are still in place, there is a very real risk that they are circumvented or at least diluted in order to increase effective crime control.

Worldwide female genital mutilation (FGM) is acknowledged as a serious violation of human rights which needs to be actively combated. However, in Europe France has been the only state to have prosecuted cases of FGM: until 2007 37 cases were tried. As for the Netherlands, (assumingly) FGM is practised on a relatively small, but regular basis. Nevertheless, no cases have been prosecuted; moreover, there have few reports of (alleged) FGM to the Centre for Advising and Reporting on Child Abuse. For the past decade the Dutch Parliament has urged the Dutch government to develop a more robust policy towards FGM, including intervention by the criminal justice system. However, to date the Dutch government has opted for a policy focusing on prevention and medical/social assistance, including a preference for a (non-)statutory reporting code. Recommendations to introduce mandatory reporting, in order to enable the transfer of information needed to enable the criminal justice authorities to intervene, have been turned down. In doing so the Dutch government is neglecting the positive obligations embedded within the case law of the European Court of Human Rights (ECtHR), prescribing that states should offer adequate and effective protection against serious forms of ill-treatment (article 3 ECHR) and/or serious violations of physical integrity (article 8 ECHR), especially to vulnerable persons. Moreover, according to the ECtHR in cases of serious violations, intervention by the criminal justice system is indicated. Thus, retaining a policy which provides no guarantees for the transfer of information needed to provide for effective and adequate protection results in a potential violation of the ECHR by the Dutch government. There is an urgent need for a change of policy. Moreover, as a result of the consistent political pressure by Parliament, the Dutch government has taken a recent interest in the way in which the French handle FGM. However, as legal and cultural conditions differ, copying the French policy is not an option. Nevertheless, there is one step that the Dutch should take: the introduction of mandatory reporting of FGM.

Following the World Banks World Development Report2000/2001: The attack on poverty and the voices of the poor studies on which that document had been based, this chapter explores Human Rights obligations of the International Financial Institutions (IFIs). In this connection poverty is approached as part of the human rights deficit. International poverty reduction strategies are examined in respect of both economic effectiveness and public justice, with special reference to pro-poor growth. Six elements of a Rights-based attack on poverty come to the fore. Finally, these are applied to IFIs in particular, with some critical remarks on the Millennium Development Goals (MDGs).

The aim of the general report is to conduct a comparative analysis of the national reports in order to trace transformation processes in domestic criminal justice systems, in particular criminal process, as special procedural measures are introduced to deal with terrorism and organised crime, and to map whether this has led countries to depart from their own fundamental rules, procedures, principles and applicable human rights standards. Starting from the premise that the integrated system of criminal law has three dimensions  the protection of individuals (the shield dimension), the provision of instruments of law enforcement (the sword dimension), and of checks and balances/trias politica (the constitutional dimension)  the report provides a comprehensive overview of interrelated transformations, mostly in the pre-trial setting, that have affected all three in three waves of war (on drugs, organised crime and terrorism). In many countries, procedural guarantees and principles that protect against the infringement of fair trial rights are considered a burden to the efficiency of serious crime enforcement. These reforms have resulted in a clear expansion of the punitive state and a blurring of classic distinctions, and do not favour the rule of law. The focus on public security and preventive coercive investigation undermines the criminal justice system. With the criminal justice system increasingly used as an instrument to regulate the present and/or the future rather than to punish past behaviour, and a criminal process in which pre-trial investigation is not about truth-finding related to committed crime, but about the construction and de-construction of social dangerousness, the interests of national security may be said to be prevailing over justice and to be threatening due process and the protection of human rights  notwithstanding that general principles of criminal procedure seem to have become more important in the reporting countries, also where organized crime and terrorism are concerned, and are designed to conform with constitutional and human rights standards.

XVIIIth International Congress of Penal Law -
The principle challenges posed by the globalization of criminal justice
Istanbul, 20-27 September 2009 -
Section III Special procedural measures and the protection of human rights -
Resolution

The case of the SGP essentially concerned the question whether the Netherlands should take measures against a Bible-based political party that bars women from its list of candidates. Against the theoretical background of human rights sociology, the rise of rights as a framework for moral discussions and the role of NGOs in rights implementation, this article assesses how rights talk, in particular based upon the Convention on the Elimination of All Forms of Discrimination against Women (CEDAW), became the language in which the discussion over orthodox womens political rights came to be framed in the Netherlands. It makes use of extensive quantitative and qualitative data to assess how this particular form of rights realization  via court cases lodged by outside NGOs  impacted upon discussions within the communities concerned, particularly amongst the women themselves. It argues that this particular form of rights realization can also have undesired effects, such as reinforcing more conservative positions and strengthening a general sense of isolation from society and relates these findings to more general discussions on talking rights in a context of religious diversity.

Sex segregation and equality in a multicultural society: inferiority as a standard for legal acceptability
Marjolein van den Brink, Assistant Professor of Legal Theory/Gender & Law at the Institute of Legal Theory, Utrecht University School of Law, Utrecht (the Netherlands)
Titia Loenen, Professor of Legal Theory/Gender & Law at the Institute of Legal Theory, Utrecht University School of Law, Utrecht (the Netherlands)
Jet Tigchelaar, Assistant Professor of the Philosophy of Law at the Institute of Legal Theory, Utrecht University School of Law, Utrecht (the Netherlands)
Abstract
This contribution explores the legal acceptability of old and new forms of sex segregation, using a multilayered inferiority test that can be regarded as a specification of (inter)national equality and non-discrimination standards. The test is applied to a number of topical cases of sex segregation: 1) A traditional case of rather uncontested sex segregation in sports, specifically in amateur football; 2) A more controversial case that seems to be on the rise once again: sex-segregated education; 3) The highly controversial case of sex-segregated integration courses in the Netherlands. The outcome shows that each sex-segregated practice is problematic in the light of one or more criteria of this inferiority test, but not necessarily the same criteria. Specific attention is paid to the merits of the test in a multicultural context. The inferiority test is a useful tool in dealing with multicultural complexity, although not in every respect. It allows the impact of sex segregation on minority women to be taken into account, as well as cultural and religious reasons which women may have in demanding sex-segregation facilities, unless this will result in perpetuating their or other womens subordination.
Our findings suggest that the inferiority test is quite useful as an analytical tool to assess contested practices of sex segregation. However, the multilayered character of the test needs some fine-tuning when the various elements of the test lead to different conclusions.

Conflicts in human rights today are often conflicts around religion and equality. They focus on headscarves, swimming lessons or prayer during school. To understand them better, we need to resist the temptation to reduce them to cases or clashes between a determinate set of rights. Rather, we need to understand the political agendas set, including the culturalization of religion and the othering of sex equality, and we need to analyse such conflicts in contexts of contested secularism, as an occurrence in a world of multi-level (and thus also contested) regulation and as a problem of multiple inequalities. To solve them, this paper suggests relying on a triangle of fundamental human rights, with substantive equality and interrelated liberty as well as dignity.

A large number of former unaccompanied minors in the Netherlands leave for unknown destinations during the asylum procedure or after being rejected. In this contribution the authors provide answers to the question how undocumented (former) unaccompanied minors provide for their iving and housing. The study is based on interviews with 118 former undocumented unaccompanied minors who were recruited through the personal networks of the researchers and through contacts with representatives of (private) organizations who support the youngsters. The undocumented minors are excluded from formal employment as well as provisions of the welfare state. By far the largest group of the undocumented (former) unaccompanied minors has never been involved in criminal activities and only one third of them work in the informal economy. The sectors in which these youngsters perform informal work vary from cleaning and construction to catering and personal services. The work is characterized by uncertain working hours. There are often few hours available and the work often takes place on call. The pay is meagre and few respondents can survive exclusively on their earnings. The undocumented (former) unaccompanied minors are mainly supported by friends and private organizations for their living and housing. It is because of this support that the youngsters do not roam the streets and can continue their illegal stay in the Netherlands. The strong orientation of the youngsters towards a lawful residence in the Netherlands causes them to fear the risks of arrest while working, so they rather settle for the limited support of private organizations and friends. The support of private organizations and the focus of the youngsters towards a lawful stay thus constitute a buffer against exploitation.

âWomenâs rights are human rights!â This notion may seem self evident, as the international system for the promotion and the protection of human rights that was installed under the auspice of the United Nations (UN) builds on the idea of equality in dignity and rights of men and women. Yet, as was convincingly showed by critics of this system, it is not. In 1993 a lobby of womenâs rights activists and organisations from all over the world gathered in Vienna at the World Conference on Human Rights to make clear to the 171 states represented there that the international human rights system ignored blatant human rights violations that occur on a daily basis in the lives of women from all over the world. The states represented at the World Conference recognised this deficiency of the international human rights system and called upon the monitoring bodies of the mainstream international human rights treaties to include the status and human rights of women in their deliberations and findings. This study examines whether two of these monitoring bodies: the UN Human Rights Committee (HRC) and the Committee on Economic, Social and Cultural Rights (CESCR) have taken up this call. It thereby focused specifically on matters that affect womenâs physical integrity. The study shows that the HRC and the CESCR make good use of the possibilities within their mandates to address issues that affect womenâs physical integrity: they address not only issues like rape and domestic violence, but also for example female genital mutilation, unsafe abortions, and lack of access to contraceptives. It is in this respect interesting to note that the monitoring bodies do not consider abortion to be a violation of any human right, but, on the contrary, recommend states that have general prohibitions on abortion to amend their laws and allow for abortion under certain circumstances. Moreover, the HRC and the CESCR generally formulate obligations for states parties that take into account the gender-specific form, circumstances and consequences of these human rights abuses. But the HRC and the CESCR could and should do more. Only in a few instances do the bodies expressly link issues like rape, female genital mutilation, and trafficking of women to discrimination of women in societies. Hence, the recommendations of the HRC and the CESCR generally do not request the states parties to tackle the root cause of human rights abuses and constraints: the subordinate position of women in society. Further action is required to overcome this deficit. In this, NGOs and academics also have an important role to play, as they should make the bodies aware of the discriminatory background and nature of specific situations and issues and could present them with ideas on how best to tackle these underlying causes. What is clear is that the request of the 1993 World Conference on Human Rights is not a short-term assignment for the monitoring bodies, but rather is a process that will be ongoing for as long as gender inequality exists. The commitment of not only UN agencies, but also academics, and NGOs is required to transform the international system so as to ensure that it fully accommodates and responds to human rights abuses and constraints that are typical of womenâs lives, now and in the future.